Why recreational pilots suck

[ClimbnSink]

Demonstrated crosswind component and actual capability of the plane are different. I've landed 172s and PA28s in 25+ direct no problem, and the 310 in direct 20G35, at night, short field. Plus, there are always other airports.

Now, I don't have an issue with personal mins or saying "I'm not flying because I don't want to." But I hear from a lot of pilots who get caught when light and variable winds turn into 15 kts unexpectedly. One would be wise to be capable of landing in such conditions in case one's planning proves to put one in such a situation inadvertently.

Some can, some can't. But if you choose to fly on a light sunny day the OP will judge you incompetent.
I'm going to be a snob and take the pro/hobby pilot argument to the next level. The best pilots were pros, realized it sucked and became hobby pilots. Ex pro hobby pilots that only fly in good weather are the best, most awesome, mega super pilots ever.

 

[Ted]

+1

Maybe a letter to the cheif counsel is in order? After all, the regs clearly arent restrictive enough

I don't think anyone on here would ask for more regs, or believe we need more. I'd argue that current regs have gotten to the point of detracting from safety since.they've made it hard for people to actually fly, which is necessary for proficiency.

That said, there's benefit to pushing logically, and many pilots don't. I'm not doing any instruction now, but I had several students in the "continuous improvement" program where we'd go do things they weren't comfortable with to expand their comfort level. I don't think any of them really flew on worse days. What they did do, though, was have significantly improved capabilities and confidence for their normal flying. No doubt they were safer.

 

[Jay Honeck]

Here's a minor example of things going the other direction. When we lived in Iowa, we would rarely fly if the winds exceeded 15, and mention of gusts was usually a no-go.

Why? Because over Iowa, winds like that meant turbulence, often bad turbulence.

When we moved to the island, we quickly discovered two things.

1. The wind is almost always 15+, and gusts are the norm. If we were going to fly, it was going to be in the wind.

2. Coming off the open waters of the Gulf, the wind is extremely linear -- meaning no turbulence whatsoever. So the wind did not matter at all. In fact, I can no longer land worth a damn without it.

So, bottom line, we now routinely fly in winds that would have kept us grounded in Iowa. We're still fair-weather pilots by choice, however.

 

[VanDy]

I tried to use my sarcasm font

I agree that going up with an instructor in conditions you don't feel comfortable with is a great idea! however, griping and moaning because the airport is busy on nice days with what you assume are inexperienced pilots that don't fly any other time, is what i have an issue with. Gross generalizations and all that fun stuff.

I don't think anyone on here would ask for more regs, or believe we need more. I'd argue that current regs have gotten to the point of detracting from safety since.they've made it hard for people to actually fly, which is necessary for proficiency.

That said, there's benefit to pushing logically, and many pilots don't. I'm not doing any instruction now, but I had several students in the "continuous improvement" program where we'd go do things they weren't comfortable with to expand their comfort level. I don't think any of them really flew on worse days. What they did do, though, was have significantly improved capabilities and confidence for their normal flying. No doubt they were safer.

 

[Ted]

I tried to use my sarcasm font

I agree that going up with an instructor in conditions you don't feel comfortable with is a great idea! however, griping and moaning because the airport is busy on nice days with what you assume are inexperienced pilots that don't fly any other time, is what i have an issue with. Gross generalizations and all that fun stuff.

You put your sarcasm up front, and Alex is simply stating things in a manner that will get people talking and thinking.

 

[Skylane81E]

You know what I did for the first time since primary training this spring?

Scrubbed a flight due to winds.

Guess I should hang up my headset

 

[VanDy]

You put your sarcasm up front, and Alex is simply stating things in a manner that will get people talking and thinking.

i guess i played right into his web then! lol

 

[AdamZ]

If you're doing something for fun, why do it in conditions that don't make it fun? It seems obvious.

It's just like snow skiing. Those of us who travel to the mountains one week a year ski every day regardless of conditions, we aren't picky. The people who live on the mountain only ski on perfect days.

Nothing wrong with either situation.

Ding Ding Ding, We have a winna!

Reallly? How can you say they suck? I mean with all due respect what business is it of yours what Wx a pilot choses to fly in. Since I suspect the vast majority of pilots are VRF only why wouldn't they pick the best days. If your just flying for a $100 hamburger I can understand why they don't want to fly in goo or get their but kicked on a turbulent day. May pilots are renters, they spend what money they can scrape together to live their dream, perhaps they take their spouse or kid or nieghbor a long for the one to three hours they can afford to fly a month, why shouldn''t they make it an enjoyable experience?

I think to say they "suck" is pretty elitist.

 

[rottydaddy]

Alex is simply stating things in a manner that will get people talking and thinking.

I guess that's one way of putting it...

 

[docmirror]

Those GA comm pilots suck. As an AF jet pilot, anytime I have to go somewhere and do some air combat, the GA comm drivers are getting in my way. You can always tell because it's "Apache blah,blah,blah with you at 14,000". Or "Cessna blah,blah,blah VFR 10.5 requesting following."

"All Piper, Beech, Cessna and Cirrus pilots should only fly 1000' above the ground, and stay out of MY way!"

/sarcasm

 

[danhagan]

After 7 years and a kajillion high wind landings (West Texas), going out and getting tumbled like you're in a dryer isn't at the top of my list (especially with pax onboard).

If the plane needs exercise and the winds are bad AND I am solo, I'll still go ... but not for any type of "currency". About half my flights are night flights due to work schedule. Nobody is ever around so I guess they're all sissified... or perhaps they have other pressing issues like kid's plays, recitals, games, etc.

With fuel at $6 a gallon, I'd prefer a fun flight over the alternative. That said, on eastbound trips I have often changed departure times to take advantage of those high winds in cruise.

 

[Alexb2000]

Ding Ding Ding, We have a winna!

Reallly? How can you say they suck? I mean with all due respect what business is it of yours what Wx a pilot choses to fly in. Since I suspect the vast majority of pilots are VRF only why wouldn't they pick the best days. If your just flying for a $100 hamburger I can understand why they don't want to fly in goo or get their but kicked on a turbulent day. May pilots are renters, they spend what money they can scrape together to live their dream, perhaps they take their spouse or kid or nieghbor a long for the one to three hours they can afford to fly a month, why shouldn''t they make it an enjoyable experience?

I think to say they "suck" is pretty elitist.

Of course it's none of my business. If we limit posts to what is someones business we can just turn off the POA lights, right?

What it is, is a personal observation, one that has caused a lot of aviation discussion, which is why I thought we're here. Perhaps you would prefer another thread on which smart phone is best?

The real question each of us should ask ourselves is would we send our child up with a PPL in 172 for some sight seeing that can't land with confidence in at least most of the examples I gave, even on a perfect day? If your answer is, "Yes, no problem" then I can respect that. If your answer is, "Ummm, probably not, conditions might change", then you are agreeing with me whether you want to say so publicly or not. That also means you are joining me as an "elitist".

 

[dell30rb]

Demonstrated crosswind component and actual capability of the plane are different. I

Yes this number basically means nothing. The M20J is listed at 12kts. Its happy in 20+

I was up with a CFI working on my tailwheel endorsement and even he could not do it. We circled around until fuel situation became urgent, then ended landing elsewhere and had a friend come pick us up in a car.

Around here many of the runways are aligned NE/SE and two weeks ago I was flying a trip in a J-3 with 15-20kt northwest winds. I'm a relatively green tailwheel guy. I planned enough fuel to get to each of my fuel stops, make a couple attempts at landing, then fly to the closest airport that was aligned with the wind - and have 30 minutes remaining when I got there. Felt like I was planning an IFR flight on a bad weather day. Oh and the plane only holds 12 gallons

 

[VanDy]

PS. I hate you with love, VanDy

Now that I see what you are saying, I will agree that flying outside your comfort level with a CFI is a great idea, however regulating it beyond what is already required for PPL/currency/etc , eh I'm not for more regulations.

When it comes to who should fly with whom then that's a very tricky situation. We all have to start somewhere and take our first pax sometime. You can't force people to make better decisions, but we can encourage it.

Of course it's none of my business. If we limit posts to what is someones business we can just turn off the POA lights, right?

What it is, is a personal observation, one that has caused a lot of aviation discussion, which is why I thought we're here. Perhaps you would prefer another thread on which smart phone is best?

The real question each of us should ask ourselves is would we send our child up with a PPL in 172 for some sight seeing that can't land with confidence in at least most of the examples I gave, even on a perfect day? If your answer is, "Yes, no problem" then I can respect that. If your answer is, "Ummm, probably not, conditions might change", then you are agreeing with me whether you want to say so publicly or not. That also means you are joining me as an "elitist".

 

[docmirror]

The real question we should ask ourselves is why some third party should decide how much risk WE are allowed to take, and on what days and times we are allowed to take it.

We already have the FAA watching what we do, we have the media watching what we do constantly, so what we should have is our own(supposedly) brother pilots bashing those who Are Not Worthy to stand in His Presence.

 

[jbarrass]

Last Tuesday on the way home from work the weather was absolutely perfect, I couldn't stand it, I had to fly. I skipped my exit, went to the airport and flew. Loved it. Wed, Thur, fri... it was raining and I went home. I guess I suck now....

 

[AdamZ]

Of course it's none of my business. If we limit posts to what is someones business we can just turn off the POA lights, right?

What it is, is a personal observation, one that has caused a lot of aviation discussion, which is why I thought we're here. Perhaps you would prefer another thread on which smart phone is best?

The real question each of us should ask ourselves is would we send our child up with a PPL in 172 for some sight seeing that can't land with confidence in at least most of the examples I gave, even on a perfect day? If your answer is, "Yes, no problem" then I can respect that. If your answer is, "Ummm, probably not, conditions might change", then you are agreeing with me whether you want to say so publicly or not. That also means you are joining me as an "elitist".

Wow thats on heck of a jump there Alex. Your last paragraph above is a decent question but its a far cry from saying that a recreational pilot sucks. FWIW if I choose not to put my kid in a plane with some one it may be for a number of reasons. My lack of comfort in their flying does not equate to them 'sucking' How about those pilots that launch into anything, do they suck? I also don't see how a pilot who checks the Wx in the AM and determines that he will get the crap kicked out of him by turbulence on the way to and from his $100 pancake run and decides he dosen't feel putting up with Mr. Toad's wild ride, sucks?

 

[ryoung99]

After reading, I think the real reason the op thinks we "suck" is because he wants to fly on those days and doesn't like being #10 in line? Everything else has been written to add a qualatative argument to his general sentiment. I really have trouble believing that he is that concerned with my currency in the discussed conditions as I cannot see how my abilities or lack there of impact him in any way.

My suggestion, find a new airport, even on nice days I am only 1-2 back.

Oh yea, stay away from the lake on July 4th, it turns out to be a busy day at the ramp.

 

[railroadjack]

I've been guilty of flying on only the "perfect" days. But, there have been times where I went flying on a perfect day, only to come back to my home airport and find wind conditions that I thought were tough for me. Never had a problem landing though. For me, it comes down to doubting myself when even my instructor has said, "You have the skills." Even though I haven't been flying much recently, I have stopped doubting myself for the most part. I look back on all those tough crosswind landings and realized that I was in control the whole time.

Night flying? Love it.

 

[RoscoeT]

We all know from reading these boards that every pilot here is an absolute bad ass, so this is just a statement about recreational pilots in general.

In Texas I am based at a very busy GA airport, KADS. There are several schools on the field and many recreational pilots. I've noticed a trend that really bothers me, that is people only fly recreationally on calm, pleasant, beautiful, absolutely perfect mornings.

Such a Saturday morning and you'll be 10 back for departure.

BUT:

Same day except the wind is 20-25 nearly right down the runway... nobody

Same day with a 15 knot crosswind.... nobody

Same day with clouds and rain (no convection).... nobody

Night: students doing the minimum requirements or.... nobody

Almost all the traffic on the less than ideal days are professionals who have to fly in any flyable conditions.

If I am honest with myself I could easily fall into the same trap. The only difference for me is that I fly from place to place on a schedule and primarily for transportation. That adds just enough pressure that I find myself in many conditions that given the choice I would be tempted do something else with my day.

Somehow making pilots fly regularly in less than ideal conditions would be the easiest way to improve safety IMO.

What say you?

You think forcing a pilot to fly in wind and with clouds and rain (VFR pilot) will make pilots safer?? Dude, what's the biggest safety issue in flying? It's bad judgment. First, as already mentioned, you have no clue about these "sucky" pilots who are not flying on these "less than ideal" days. And second, even if somehow they lacked the skill to land a spam can tricycle trainer in a 15KT x-wind (I doubt that) and to fly around on a day with "clouds and rain" (WFT??), then they are exercising good judgement in not flying in conditions they are not well-prepared for. Sounds like safe pilots to me. Sound to me like you haven't been a pilot very long, and have just enough experience (ignorance??) to think you're better than most, and probably don't realize that many of those other "sucky" saps probably have a lot more flying experience than you.

 

[murphey]

After reading, I think the real reason the op thinks we "suck" is because he wants to fly on those days and doesn't like being #10 in line? Everything else has been written to add a qualatative argument to his general sentiment.

+1

 

[Threefingeredjack]

We should make all recreational boaters test their skills during small craft warnings too.

I spent a good many hours retrieving flotsam who chose to do just that. The difference between boats and airplanes is with planes instead of floating debris you get a smoking hole. I don't have any problem with folks who choose their time and place to suit their comfort zone, in fact I am one of them. After 15k+ hours flying in every kind of weather you can imagine, (and some you probably can't), day or night I like the luxury of picking my weather. I still fly IFR when the need arises, but over the years have gotten to the point that it is just another way to navigate and not much more. So if a hard core bad-ass is stuck behind me on the taxiway some sunny Sunday morning, too freakin' bad.

 

[Alexb2000]

Wow thats on heck of a jump there Alex. Your last paragraph above is a decent question but its a far cry from saying that a recreational pilot sucks. FWIW if I choose not to put my kid in a plane with some one it may be for a number of reasons. My lack of comfort in their flying does not equate to them 'sucking' How about those pilots that launch into anything, do they suck? I also don't see how a pilot who checks the Wx in the AM and determines that he will get the crap kicked out of him by turbulence on the way to and from his $100 pancake run and decides he dosen't feel putting up with Mr. Toad's wild ride, sucks?

That pilot does suck IF s/he is using turbulence as an excuse when deep down inside they know their basic skills have atrophied and they are just a little unsure they can handle it.

The pilot that launches into anything is a whole other topic and YES they suck too.

You think forcing a pilot to fly in wind and with clouds and rain (VFR pilot) will make pilots safer?? Dude, what's the biggest safety issue in flying? It's bad judgment. First, as already mentioned, you have no clue about these "sucky" pilots who are not flying on these "less than ideal" days. And second, even if somehow they lacked the skill to land a spam can tricycle trainer in a 15KT x-wind (I doubt that) and to fly around on a day with "clouds and rain" (WFT??), then they are exercising good judgement in not flying in conditions they are not well-prepared for. Sounds like safe pilots to me. Sound to me like you haven't been a pilot very long, and have just enough experience (ignorance??) to think you're better than most, and probably don't realize that many of those other "sucky" saps probably have a lot more flying experience than you.

Dude, who said VFR pilot into IMC? I'm saying in benign IMC conditions you would expect to see/hear more IFR rated recreational pilots out staying proficient in actual. Especially in Texas because some parts of the year it's hard to find. Is that good judgement or would 6 approaches in a Frasca with a Coke in their hands be just as good?

I'm an average pilot at best. I do believe you have to practice basic skills in actual conditions to remain proficient and I do (that's the point of the thread). Since it sounds like you are a way above average and very experienced pilot, maybe you can stay razor sharp flying in only calm winds and sunny days, but can the rest of us?

 

[N5922S]

We all know from reading these boards that every pilot here is an absolute bad ass, so this is just a statement about recreational pilots in general.

In Texas I am based at a very busy GA airport, KADS. There are several schools on the field and many recreational pilots. I've noticed a trend that really bothers me, that is people only fly recreationally on calm, pleasant, beautiful, absolutely perfect mornings.

Such a Saturday morning and you'll be 10 back for departure.

BUT:

Same day except the wind is 20-25 nearly right down the runway... nobody

Same day with a 15 knot crosswind.... nobody

Same day with clouds and rain (no convection).... nobody

Night: students doing the minimum requirements or.... nobody

Almost all the traffic on the less than ideal days are professionals who have to fly in any flyable conditions.

If I am honest with myself I could easily fall into the same trap. The only difference for me is that I fly from place to place on a schedule and primarily for transportation. That adds just enough pressure that I find myself in many conditions that given the choice I would be tempted do something else with my day.

Somehow making pilots fly regularly in less than ideal conditions would be the easiest way to improve safety IMO.

What say you?

Sounds like your main gripe is departure delays. I sympathize with you there. However, KADS has lots of intersections for quickie departures (surely you don't need 6000') so you can drink upstream from the herd.

 

[Todd Copeland]

We all know from reading these boards that every pilot here is an absolute bad ass, so this is just a statement about recreational pilots in general.

In Texas I am based at a very busy GA airport, KADS. There are several schools on the field and many recreational pilots. I've noticed a trend that really bothers me, that is people only fly recreationally on calm, pleasant, beautiful, absolutely perfect mornings.

Such a Saturday morning and you'll be 10 back for departure.

BUT:

Same day except the wind is 20-25 nearly right down the runway... nobody

Same day with a 15 knot crosswind.... nobody

Same day with clouds and rain (no convection).... nobody

Night: students doing the minimum requirements or.... nobody

Almost all the traffic on the less than ideal days are professionals who have to fly in any flyable conditions.

If I am honest with myself I could easily fall into the same trap. The only difference for me is that I fly from place to place on a schedule and primarily for transportation. That adds just enough pressure that I find myself in many conditions that given the choice I would be tempted do something else with my day.

Somehow making pilots fly regularly in less than ideal conditions would be the easiest way to improve safety IMO.

What say you?

Look at the stats, loss of controll is the number one cause of accidents. Usually landing and take off. Wind.
Night flying for non instrument pilots is statistically dangerous.
Clouds with rain, no convective activity? Instrument rating required if ceiling or visibility is in question.
So, all those times the basic vfr low time pilots aren't flying and not very current: they had better wait for the VERY NICE DAYS.

 

[Mike5250]

So you would rather have it really busy all the time? I've cancelled local flights when winds are 25kt+ down the runway to avoid paying $200 to get bounced around for a FUN local flight. I usually take passengers and it won't be much fun for them either. Minimums change real quick if I want to go somewhere or want to get home, and for that reason I'll make sure to fly in less than perfect wx to stay current.

 

[Alexb2000]

Look at the stats, loss of controll is the number one cause of accidents. Usually landing and take off. Wind.
Night flying for non instrument pilots is statistically dangerous.
Clouds with rain, no convective activity? Instrument rating required if ceiling or visibility is in question.
So, all those times the basic vfr low time pilots aren't flying and not very current: they had better wait for the VERY NICE DAYS.

I agree. What to do about it seems to be the question. Some say those are the reasons to only fly in perfect day VFR conditions. I say, all the more reason to practice whenever you feel rusty and nature gives you the chance. It doesn't mean you have to take your mother in law up into a level 5 storm, although some of us have considered it.

So you would rather have it really busy all the time? I've cancelled local flights when winds are 25kt+ down the runway to avoid paying $200 to get bounced around for a FUN local flight. I usually take passengers and it won't be much fun for them either. Minimums change real quick if I want to go somewhere or want to get home, and for that reason I'll make sure to fly in less than perfect wx to stay current.

I would rather have it busy all the time, if it increased proficiency and thus safety in our community. If I wasn't prepared to wait I would move bases. In other threads people will argue to the death that all these new avionics haven't increased safety. Perhaps that is because the cost of flying is making people less proficient and therefore more dangerous, nothing to do with avionics that are arguably making it easier to stay proficient.

If you know you're current, then I'd save the $200 also. I couldn't disagree with that. It's about common sense and honest self-assesment IMO.

 

[fnpdoc]

Why on earth would you make the jump to "suck" from private pilots being conservative and being safety conscious?
I also try not to fly in adverse conditions. We all have our own go/no go. In Cordova, AK there is not much choice unfortunately.

We all know from reading these boards that every pilot here is an absolute bad ass, so this is just a statement about recreational pilots in general.

In Texas I am based at a very busy GA airport, KADS. There are several schools on the field and many recreational pilots. I've noticed a trend that really bothers me, that is people only fly recreationally on calm, pleasant, beautiful, absolutely perfect mornings.

Such a Saturday morning and you'll be 10 back for departure.

BUT:

Same day except the wind is 20-25 nearly right down the runway... nobody

Same day with a 15 knot crosswind.... nobody

Same day with clouds and rain (no convection).... nobody

Night: students doing the minimum requirements or.... nobody

Almost all the traffic on the less than ideal days are professionals who have to fly in any flyable conditions.

If I am honest with myself I could easily fall into the same trap. The only difference for me is that I fly from place to place on a schedule and primarily for transportation. That adds just enough pressure that I find myself in many conditions that given the choice I would be tempted do something else with my day.

Somehow making pilots fly regularly in less than ideal conditions would be the easiest way to improve safety IMO.

What say you?

 

[Alexb2000]

Why on earth would you make the jump to "suck" from private pilots being conservative and being safety conscious?
I also try not to fly in adverse conditions. We all have our own go/no go. In Cordova, AK there is not much choice unfortunately.

Why is staying on the ground when the wind is 15 knots safety conscious?

I guess that means that a pilot with those limits also shouldn't get too far from home or risk inadvertently getting into those kinds of winds?

If they don't get too far, then they better also make sure they fly early in the morning, so there is less chance of a wind coming up?

Over time will a pilot under those rules improve their wind handling ability or will it get even worse as time passes?

 

[poadeleted21]

If you're doing something for fun, why do it in conditions that don't make it fun? It seems obvious.

It's just like snow skiing. Those of us who travel to the mountains one week a year ski every day regardless of conditions, we aren't picky. The people who live on the mountain only ski on perfect days.

Nothing wrong with either situation.

I can't stand the out of control knuckle draggers that don't put in the work then want to show up on pow days and @#$%^ up the snow. Friggin teenage snowboarders heel slipping all the @#$%^&ing snow off the side of the mountain. This is why I got myself a backcountry setup and learned myself on avalanches.

 

[garyb]

I confess. It was me. Me and nine others went out to your airport to introduce 10 newcomers to aviation, and we wanted to be good ambassadors to GA and wait until conditions were perfect so they'd have a good first experience and become supporters of aviation.

We'll never make that mistake again.

 

[JWhistler]

Bingo. One should never presume that pilots who like to go out on fair weather days are only fair weather pilots.

Also, in my opinion the title and tone of the original post does absolutely nothing to help advance the cause of recreational aviation. Imagine a new pilot coming here for advice or just to 'hang' and seeing "Why recreational Pilots suck" plastered there at the top of the page. Tounge in cheek or not (I doubt it actually was, just covering my bases), people can and will take it as demeaning and offensive.

 

[Morne]

Before this gets too far afield.

Pro-pilots on their days off, don't count either, currency is obviously not an issue.

This is about the typical private pilot, years out from training, doing the absolute minimum for currency on perfect days and sims for IFR currency.

Here is an example of an accident that still bothers me:

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief2.aspx?ev_id=20111024X42713&ntsbno=CEN12FA037&akey=1

We could go on with a million examples, but the reality is that after a rating it is up to us as individuals to keep a level of proficiency that doesn't kill the unsuspecting passengers.

I just don't know how you do that on benign Saturday mornings and NO I don't think pilots flying around that can't perform the PTS of their rating does aviation any favors.

Your cite doesn't support your hypothesis.

ANY pilot of ANY skill level who doesn't personally verify fuel levels will one day end up landing off field at best, or a smoking hole at worst. NO amount of cross-wind practice or night flying puts extra gallons of 100LL in the tanks. Like, duh.

ADM has to be the most important, and seemingly hardest to learn, skillset in aviation. Yet you seem to fault those displaying good ADM who only fly within their, perhaps meager, abilities. How about you go down to the DMV and see if you can pass a driving test like you did when you were 16, ace? Sure, executing to the PTS should be within every pilot's grasp any day of the week. But reality disagrees.

The crash cited was not about the pilot being incapable of finding the field on an ILS with 3sm vis and OVC at 1400' AGL. It was about ADM in general and fuel management in particular (having enough plus reserves is the first step in fuel management). I have shot a VOR-A into +RA OVC 600' AGL and 1sm vis and found the field. I am under 300 hours TT with a fresh IR check ride 4 months ago. I am NOT a commercial or ace pilot, just a guy who needs to get where he is going.

Being so new I recall from another forum what people said when I proposed getting my PPASEL for commuting/traveling for my business needs. I was told by arrogant jocks like the OP that flying was serious stuff to be left to the pros unless all I wanted to do was circle my home drone and give joy rides to my friends. The classic reason for GA, enabling individuals to go where the airlines don't, was dead in their eyes. I didn't let it discourage me but it sure angered me, much as the OP's condescending attitude and utter failure to support his position has angered me. This has to be the least welcoming hobby/pursuit/club I know of, and I belong to a few with risks at least equivalent.

So, in the nicest way I can say it, OP you are an unnecessarily belligerent mope with no capacity to defend your indefensible opinion. I sincerely hope that next time you are 11th for departure you take the time to just appreciate the perfect weather and not be a Debbie Downer for aviation as a freaking whole.

 

[AdamZ]

That pilot does suck IF s/he is using turbulence as an excuse when deep down inside they know their basic skills have atrophied and they are just a little unsure they can handle it.

...

My point is not everyone who opts not to fly on a turbulent day does so because their skills are not up to the task. They may just feel the pancakes aren't worth having their head smashed into the canopy every 10 minutes

But to take it one step further, do you have personal minimums that differ from the legal minimums or aircraft maximums?

 

[JWhistler]

Not long ago, on one of those sunny days with calm winds, I was in the run-up area testing the mags when a pilot in the pattern made his call over CTAF to turn final.

At about the same time, the plane holding short in front of me - piloted by one of those "badass" high hour pilots who will fly in any kind of weather and loves to challenge himself (and make sure everyone knows about it) rolled on to the runway without so much as a call on CTAF. The other pilot was forced to execute a go-around and radioed for the pilot taking the active to abort his takeoff.

Fortunately a potential accident was avoided, thanks to the pilot on final. Oh, yea...he was a student pilot out practicing in the pattern.

 

[Alexb2000]

Your cite doesn't support your hypothesis.

ANY pilot of ANY skill level who doesn't personally verify fuel levels will one day end up landing off field at best, or a smoking hole at worst. NO amount of cross-wind practice or night flying puts extra gallons of 100LL in the tanks. Like, duh.

ADM has to be the most important, and seemingly hardest to learn, skillset in aviation. Yet you seem to fault those displaying good ADM who only fly within their, perhaps meager, abilities. How about you go down to the DMV and see if you can pass a driving test like you did when you were 16, ace? Sure, executing to the PTS should be within every pilot's grasp any day of the week. But reality disagrees.

The crash cited was not about the pilot being incapable of finding the field on an ILS with 3sm vis and OVC at 1400' AGL. It was about ADM in general and fuel management in particular (having enough plus reserves is the first step in fuel management). I have shot a VOR-A into +RA OVC 600' AGL and 1sm vis and found the field. I am under 300 hours TT with a fresh IR check ride 4 months ago. I am NOT a commercial or ace pilot, just a guy who needs to get where he is going.

Being so new I recall from another forum what people said when I proposed getting my PPASEL for commuting/traveling for my business needs. I was told by arrogant jocks like the OP that flying was serious stuff to be left to the pros unless all I wanted to do was circle my home drone and give joy rides to my friends. The classic reason for GA, enabling individuals to go where the airlines don't, was dead in their eyes. I didn't let it discourage me but it sure angered me, much as the OP's condescending attitude and utter failure to support his position has angered me. This has to be the least welcoming hobby/pursuit/club I know of, and I belong to a few with risks at least equivalent.

So, in the nicest way I can say it, OP you are an unnecessarily belligerent mope with no capacity to defend your indefensible opinion. I sincerely hope that next time you are 11th for departure you take the time to just appreciate the perfect weather and not be a Debbie Downer for aviation as a freaking whole.

You seem like a nice person and I'm sure a good pilot. Hopefully your good will will bolster the pilot community and make up for my numerous short comings, which you have so accurately outlined.

My point is not everyone who opts not to fly on a turbulent day does so because their skills are not up to the task. They may just feel the pancakes aren't worth having their head smashed into the canopy every 10 minutes

But to take it one step further, do you have personal minimums that differ from the legal minimums or aircraft maximums?

I agree, hopefully that is clear enough. Interestingly I have never once mentioned turbulence, everyone just decided to add it in on their own since, well, it's more fun that way. Not every day with 15 knot or 25 knot winds is uncomfortably turbulent and really it had nothing to do with my post, but that's OK often winds include turbulence so I get the point.

I don't really believe in personal minimums as hard and fast rules, because locations and situations require being adaptable. For example in general I believe a current instrument pilot should be comfortable flying an approach to minimums, however some combinations of airports, aircraft capabilities, and weather might require more conservative operations.

Not long ago, on one of those sunny days with calm winds, I was in the run-up area testing the mags when a pilot in the pattern made his call over CTAF to turn final.

At about the same time, the plane holding short in front of me - piloted by one of those "badass" high hour pilots who will fly in any kind of weather and loves to challenge himself (and make sure everyone knows about it) rolled on to the runway without so much as a call on CTAF. The other pilot was forced to execute a go-around and radioed for the pilot taking the active to abort his takeoff.

Fortunately a potential accident was avoided, thanks to the pilot on final. Oh, yea...he was a student pilot out practicing in the pattern.

I don't think a pilot that lands with 25 knots straight down the runway is going to get any free drinks at the bar. Is that the kind of any weather "Badass" you're referring to?

 

[airguy]

It's all in what you're seeking.

I live and breathe flying, love it, live it, think about it constantly. I'm perfectly comfortable in making a turbulent approach to min's or near them, but not everyone is after the same experience.

I was going to go flying with my 172 partner the other day (I'm building an experimental RV9A) and there were about 3/8 mild gentle puffy clouds coming up overhead. He looked up, shook his head, and said "That doesn't look like fun. These days I fly for fun - if it ain't fun, I ain't flyin'."

Same guy, talking about crosswind landings as I was trying to talk him into doing them for practice in case it became real one day and he had to do it: "What happens if the wind is jacked up and you HAVE to land there in a crosswind?" "Screw that - I always have enough fuel to go somewhere with a good runway."

Same guy, talking about lowering ceilings when you might have to use an IFR approach (he's VFR only): "Screw that - I'm putting this thing down on a highway and talking to the first car that stops."

It's not for everybody.

 

[docmirror]

Interestingly I have never once mentioned turbulence, everyone just decided to add it in on their own since, well, it's more fun that way.

*************************************************

I don't really believe in personal minimums as hard and fast rules, because locations and situations require being adaptable.

No they didn't. I rejected your position in this thread out of pure sanctimony.

**************************************************

Oye vey - the thread that keeps on giving. A self-aggrandized GA pilot that has Somewhere To Go, and has no personal minimums as a hard and fast rule.

Oye vey

 

[Alexb2000]

It's all in what you're seeking.

I live and breathe flying, love it, live it, think about it constantly. I'm perfectly comfortable in making a turbulent approach to min's or near them, but not everyone is after the same experience.

I was going to go flying with my 172 partner the other day (I'm building an experimental RV9A) and there were about 3/8 mild gentle puffy clouds coming up overhead. He looked up, shook his head, and said "That doesn't look like fun. These days I fly for fun - if it ain't fun, I ain't flyin'."

Same guy, talking about crosswind landings as I was trying to talk him into doing them for practice in case it became real one day and he had to do it: "What happens if the wind is jacked up and you HAVE to land there in a crosswind?" "Screw that - I always have enough fuel to go somewhere with a good runway."

Same guy, talking about lowering ceilings when you might have to use an IFR approach (he's VFR only): "Screw that - I'm putting this thing down on a highway and talking to the first car that stops."

It's not for everybody.

Productive post. I agree 100% that someone should be able to land in reasonable wind conditions in case of an emergency, even if they choose not to fly in whatever conditions normally. It's not about being a bad ass, it's just part of the PPL PTS, nothing more exotic. I guess that expectation is over the top to many here.

No they didn't. I rejected your position in this thread out of pure sanctimony.

**************************************************

Oye vey - the thread that keeps on giving. A self-aggrandized GA pilot that has Somewhere To Go, and has no personal minimums as a hard and fast rule.

Oye vey

Oye vey right back at cha.

 

[ClimbnSink]

See this is what happens when you have welfare airports. If we didn't have other peoples money to build paved public monstrosities we wouldn't have to wait in line to takeoff. Just taxi out to the backyard strip and go. Don't want to wait in line on sunny days build your own airport.